Segwit Reading Assignment

Blockchain and Bitcoin 101
#4095
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    To increase the block size.
  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    SegWit fixed transaction malleability by removing the signature information and storing it outside the base transaction block.
  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
    SegWit boosted Bitcoin transaction capacity by taking frequent, small transaction off-chain, only settling on the Bitcoin blockchain when the users are ready.
  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No.
1 Like
#4096
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increase block size limit (Bitcoin Cash)

  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

It solved an issue of transaction malleability.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit allows for projects, that depend on unconfirmed transactions, to be less risky. Because now the scriptSigs are separate from the base transaction.

  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

No because Segwit isn’t a hard update it is a soft update. Meaning that previous transactions will still work on the new or old protocols. (Soft fork)

1 Like
#4097
  1. A proposed alternative was to increase block size to 2 megabytes instead of 1.
    2.It also solved the issue of transaction malleability.
  2. Segwit supports the development of lightening network which is a layer 2 protocol. With the malleability issue solved there is less risk leaving unconfirmed transactions offline.
  3. No one is forced necessarily. Not all wallets of have adopted the segwit protocol. Also a Hardfork known as bitcoin cash did not adopt segwit and instead decided to increase the blocksize to 2 megabytes.
1 Like
#4098

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

  • increase the block size (now bitcoin cash)

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

  • fixed the mallebility problem, usage will go up because transactions fees should go down because blocks contain more transactions.

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

  • Segwit brought the support of the layer 2 protocol, lightning network, which will take smaller transactions offchain and bringing them back onchain when users are ready.

Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

  • no, this was a soft fork and bitcoin cash was essentially developed because of segwit.
1 Like
#4099

  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
    Increasing the size/weight of the blocks.

  2. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
    Thanks to the fact that the signature is stored out of the block, separated from the hash, it makes the hacking through malleability impossible

  3. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

Segwit makes the second internet layer possible. Therefore making the lightening (supported by the second layer), possible

  1. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?.
    No it’s not, however it makes the functionalities less practical and all the platforms are working on it or already have it.
1 Like
#4100
  1. An increase in block size.
  2. SegWit solved the transaction malleability bug and also supports the development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network.
  3. The Lightning network is an application on top of the bitcoin network, which would have been vulnerable to attacks before segwit.
  4. SegWit is a soft fork therefore compatible with the previous ruleset.
1 Like
#4101

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?
The proposed and prior alternative to segwit was to increase the block size
to allow for more transactions to flow through. This was adapted by Bitcoin
Cash.
What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?
SegWit also solved the transaction malleability problem.
This allowed for changes to happen which would affect the transaction id.

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?
The lightning network is a second layer protocol.

Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?
No.

1 Like
#4102
  1. Increase the size of the blocks from 1mB to 2mB.
  2. It also saved the transaction malleability issue which allowed transaction recipients to change the signature on the transaction.
  3. By Segwit removing the signatures on a transaction, it allowed the Lightning network to take frequent, small transactions off-chain and allow them to collect and settle with the bitcoin network when they were ready.
  4. Not forced but it would be in their best interest to implement it so they are not left out of any gains associated with the upgrade.
1 Like
#4103
  1. What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

To increase the block size which would also cause a hard fork.

  1. What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

It solved the block size issue as well as the transaction ID malleability issue by separating out from the transaction signatures. The signatures alone had represented 65% of the block size so the Segwit fix moves the signature from input to a structure towards the end of a transaction which increases the one MB limit for block sizes to close to four MB.

  1. How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

SegWit solves Transaction Malleability issue which enables the “Lightning Network”, an overlay network of micropayment channels, hypothetically resolving the scaling problem by enabling virtually unlimited numbers of instant, low-fee transactions to occur “off chain”.

a) Are people’s, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

No they are not forced to use a Segwit wallet and they will be able to send their bitcoin to a Segwit supported wallet but NOT the other way around.

1 Like
#4104
  1. It was proposed to increase the block side, thus allowing more transactions to be processed/confirmed per block.
  2. It also solved the transaction malleability of Bitcoin.
  3. Segwit facilitates the development of second-layer protocols such as Lightning by fixing the malleability issue.
  4. Since it is a soft fork, there is no point at which miners will be booted off the network if they refuse to confirm. However is is likely that eventually, all transactions will use the new protocol.
1 Like
#4105
  1. A proposed alternate to segwit was increasing block size. Many saw this as only a temporary solution.
  2. In addition to the scaling issue, segwit also solved tx malleability, lowered fees, and supported a second layer solution.
  3. The lightning network is a protocol that builds onto segwit which allows tx time to be quicker.
  4. Nothing is forced to use segwit as older nodes still exist.
1 Like
#4106

  1. A proposed alternative to Segwit was to double the blocksize from 1mB to 2mB

  2. In addition to the scaling issue SegWit also solved the malleability issue i.e. the ability to modify a transaction message without altering its apparent validity. In addition it facilitated the development of second layer protocols such as the lightning network.

  3. Segwit and the Lightning network are connected because it was made possible by SegWit and the lightning network will further boost bitcoin’s transaction capacity.

  4. Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit? No, bitcoin cash for example is a fork from those resistant to SegWit although major wallets such as Trezor, Ledger, Electrum and Kraken have already done so with many more including coinbase working to use it.

1 Like
#4107
  1. Increase the block size, which would have meant to do a hard fork.
  2. Transaction malleability
  3. Because by solving transaction malleability you make features that rely on unconfirmed transactions less risky and thus second layer solutions such as lightning network can be developed.
  4. It is a soft fork that created new addresses, so old addresses could also be used.

@filip I have a doubt regarding this, becase if I remember correctly, when soft forks happen usually the longest chain survives. But here apparently both chains (the updated one and the old one) were producing blocks for a long time, both valid. How does everything gets reconciled? Does the new chain (segwit) appends all blocks produced by both, and the old chain just when non-segwit addresses are involved? Or how does this work?

#4108

No, that’s not possible always the chain with greater POW wins. Here is an interesting article https://medium.com/@lightcoin/the-differences-between-a-hard-fork-a-soft-fork-and-a-chain-split-and-what-they-mean-for-the-769273f358c9 .

#4109

Yes got confused since there were segwit and non-segwit addresses and transactions, and segwit took some time to be implemented so at the beginning not everyone adopted it, so it made me think, mistakenly, that there were two different chains coexisting for some time but apparently that was not the case. I just think that this issue should have been much better explained in that section.

#4110

  1. The proposed alternative was to simply increase the maximum size of the block.

  2. It solved malleability issue, which means that you can’t change the transaction id anymore.

  3. Segwit removed alot of risk included with unconfirmed transactions, which makes 2nd layer protocols safer and viable.

  4. They are not forced to use it, since the transactions that go into the block are still max 1mB, even when the block can be up to 4mB with the witness data.

1 Like
#4111
  1. increase to blocksize from 1mB to 2mB
  2. it solved the malleability issues that bitcoin had before. Because the sign. data was separated from the transaction data and the signing no longer influenced the Hash.
  3. The malleability fix made it less risky for second layer protocols to exist on the BTC blockchain. projects like lightning network were able to roll out because of the segwit softfork.
  4. No they are not forced to, Segwit was a soft fork, which means that nodes that don’t update still will be able to use the same chain.
1 Like
#4112
  1. Increasing the block size.
  2. Provides second layer protocols on network, such as the lightning network.
  3. Segwit allows for lightning network to function.
  4. No, but they probably will use it.
1 Like
#4113

BASED ON COINDESK ARTICLE

https://web.archive.org/web/20191001083147/https://www.coindesk.com/information/what-is-segwit

What was a proposed alternative to Segwit?

Increasing block size limit, which is what bitcoin cash did, when it separated from BTC in a fork.

What did Segwit solve more than just the scaling issue?

Segwit also solves the issue of transaction malleability, because it separates signatures from the data used in the hashes which produce transaction IDs. If a signature is changed, the transaction ID is not affected, and this results in greater security and more reliability.

How is Segwit and the Lightning network connected?

By fixing the issue with malleability, SegWit supported development of second layer protocols, such as the lightning network. This was because relying on unconfirmed transactions became less risky.

Are people, wallets and other services forced to use Segwit?

No, they are not forced to use SegWit.

1 Like
#4114

  1. The proposed alternative to Segwit was larger block sizes [i.e. Bitcoin Cash].

  2. Segwit solved the problem of malleability which changed the tx hash.

  3. Lightening is a second layer protocol which now works more securely on BTC because Segwit makes unconfirmed transactions less risky.
    Lightening works by taking small, regular transactions off the blockchain, settling the transaction on chain later when the user is ready to do so.

  4. Not all users, wallets or services are forced to use Segwit because it is a soft fork, but it is likely all will adopt it in time.

1 Like